On 04/02/2019 17:06, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 04.02.19 at 15:58, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 04/02/2019 14:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 04.02.19 at 15:22, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> On 04/02/2019 13:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 04.02.19 at 12:41, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -64,37 +54,37 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct vcpu *, last_vcpu);
>>>>>> static int __init parse_vpmu_params(const char *s)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> const char *ss;
>>>>>> + int rc = 0, val;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + do {
>>>>>> + ss = strchr(s, ',');
>>>>>> + if ( !ss )
>>>>>> + ss = strchr(s, '\0');
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if ( (val = parse_bool(s, ss)) >= 0 )
>>>>>> + opt_vpmu_enabled = val;
>>>>>> + else if ( !cmdline_strcmp(s, "bts") )
>>>>>> + vpmu_features |= XENPMU_FEATURE_INTEL_BTS;
>>>>>> + else if ( !cmdline_strcmp(s, "ipc") )
>>>>>> + vpmu_features |= XENPMU_FEATURE_IPC_ONLY;
>>>>>> + else if ( !cmdline_strcmp(s, "arch") )
>>>>>> + vpmu_features |= XENPMU_FEATURE_ARCH_ONLY;
>>>>>> + else
>>>>>> + rc = -EINVAL;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - switch ( parse_bool(s, NULL) )
>>>>>> - {
>>>>>> - case 0:
>>>>>> - break;
>>>>>> - default:
>>>>>> - do {
>>>>>> - ss = strchr(s, ',');
>>>>>> - if ( !ss )
>>>>>> - ss = strchr(s, '\0');
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> - if ( !cmdline_strcmp(s, "bts") )
>>>>>> - vpmu_features |= XENPMU_FEATURE_INTEL_BTS;
>>>>>> - else if ( !cmdline_strcmp(s, "ipc") )
>>>>>> - vpmu_features |= XENPMU_FEATURE_IPC_ONLY;
>>>>>> - else if ( !cmdline_strcmp(s, "arch") )
>>>>>> - vpmu_features |= XENPMU_FEATURE_ARCH_ONLY;
>>>>>> - else
>>>>>> - return -EINVAL;
>>>>>> + s = ss + 1;
>>>>>> + } while ( *ss );
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + /* Selecting bts/ipc/arch forces vpmu to enabled. */
>>>>>> + if ( vpmu_features )
>>>>>> + opt_vpmu_enabled = true;
>>>>> If you want to retain original behavior, the condition here would need
>>>>> to be "!rc && vpmu_features". It's not clear whether your modification
>>>>> in this regard is intentional.
>>>> Oh - that wasn't intentional.
>>>>
>>>> An alternative, now I think about it, is to just have the <bool>=false
>>>> case clear vpmu_features. This is new behaviour, but it is more
>>>> consistent with how other options work, and it wasn't expressable before.
>>> Generally - yes. But what would e.g. "vpmu=off,ipc" end up doing in
>>> your new model?
>>
>> The use of vpmu_features is somewhat weird. "bts" acts as an extra
>> feature on top of "generally on", whereas "ipc" and "arch" act as
>> restrictions on top of "generally on".
>
> Okay let's go that route then.
Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com>
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
